Tuesday, May 3, 2011

An All New Fertilizer, Thanks to You!


        Fertilizer. It’s a term we know about, learned about, but never really paid much attention too. Most fertilizers are made of other animals’ wastes, we are already aware of this piece of information. Today, a new term called “biosolid” has been introduced to society.

      
       Biosolids are nutrient-rich materials that result from the treatment of municipal wastewater. They contain nitrogen, phosporus and organic matter as well as essential micro-nutrients such as copper, iron, molybdenum and zinc, all of which are important for plant growth and soil fertility. Ontario has successfully regulated land application of sewage biosolids as a crop fertilizer since the early 1970's.
       Most of you are probably thinking, really? The very things we get rid of with a flush of a toilet, are now used to help grow the food we eat. But, believe it or not, biosolids have their share of pros, and not surprisingly, its share of cons. 
        The biggest disadvantage of biosolids is that it is a potential health hazard, and this one explains itself. Biosolids are reported to contain: Pharmaceuticals, steroids, flame-retardants, metals, hormones and human pathogens, among other things. There is also the risk of contamination in biosolids as it can accumulate industrial waste and it may contain hazardous chemicals. Another disadvantage, and this time more for farmers, is that it decreases land property value, and there is also the issue of the odor biosolids give off. Nevertheless, biosolids do have their share of advantages. Sewage biosolids are a valuable nutrient source for growing field crops such as corn, soybeans, canola and cereals. They are also highly suitable for growing forage crops and for improving pasture. Biosolids reduce the need for commercial fertilizers, so it reduced production costs. It also improves soil fertility, soil structure and permeability. Lastly, it adds organic matter and reduces the potential for soil erosion and runoff.

      
       To many of us, the issue of biosolids is a mind-splitter. On one hand, biosolids are proving to be better for the soil and appears to be cheaper. This is great for many farmers. On the other hand though, biosolids are dangerous to our health. It may contain numerous hazardous chemicals for all we know. As humans, we already use other animals’ wastes as fertilizers, so why do we make a huge issue about using our own wastes instead? People are torn in the issue. Many are fine with using biosolids as fertilizers. Farmers are already embracing some of the advantages it gives them and their farms. Others still haven’t ‘embraced’ biosolids, finding it unsanitary. It’s true that when we use biosolids to help grow our food, we are technically digesting back what our body disposed of. When it comes to biosolids, we automatically assume that it’s a bad idea. Right now, it’s not the biggest problem we have in the world, and it’s pros and cons are pretty equal at the moment. Our society just needs more time to educate themselves in this issue and figure out how to deal with biosolids, eventually.

Word Count: 500

References:
Blogs I Commented On:
1. Dora's BioBlog
2. Claudia's BioBlog
Posted by at 3 comments:

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

SoftScan - A Step in the Right Direction

        Canada, as a country, isn’t famous for its contributions to medical technology. More and more each day, scientists and researchers around the world discover and develop a new type of technology, which give us a deeper understanding of our internal body systems and their characteristics. Recently, Canada has been more than willing to contribute its share. In fact, one of its companies, called ART (Advanced Research Technologies Inc.), developed a new type of device used to screen for breast cancer. This new device is called SoftScan, and it has its list of disadvantages and advantages.     
        “According to the Canadian Cancer Society, more than 22,000 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2006, and an estimated 5,300 will die from the disease. Conventional mammographies miss up to 30 percent of cancers." Traditional anatomical breast imaging, such as mammography. does not capture the biochemistry, physiology, or the patient's response to therapy until the anatomy changes. It has so called 'blind spots' that limit its capabilities.

SoftScan by ART

        SoftScan, on the other hand uses near-infrared light, combined with time domain technology, to obtain 3D images in place of mammography. SoftScan images characterize tissue on the basis of cellular structure and tissue blood perfusion. The SoftScan device is comprised of: an optical acquisition station, and a review workstation.
        Slowly, SoftScan is proving to be more convenient than the original mammography, still used today to screen for breast cancer. SoftScan's high specificity allows health professionals to locate tumours which are either 'benign or malignant.' The device could also reduce the number of painful and often unnecessary biopses currently performed following suspicious mammograms. These biopses can cost up to one billion dollars a year! Also, SoftScan doesn't emit ionizing radiation, so any number of scans can be done without risk. Compared to mammography, this is great, considering the fact that mammography use is limited. As a treatment-monitoring tool, SoftScan can allow specialists to see immediately is a course of action is working and then adjust or interrupt treatment. This itself could lead to: shorter treatments, less suffering for patients, better results and lower costs for the health care system.


        Without a doubt, SoftScam continues to have advantages for patients, health care professionals, and health care providers. Currently, Sunnybrook is the first health centre to purchase a SoftScan imaging system since ART received regulatory approval from Health Canada for the commercialization of its optical breast imaging device.        
       As more time passes, the closer we get to reaching a better understanding of our lives, our world, and our human bodies. Though Canada may be a 'late bloomer' when it comes to contributing to medical technology, there's never a moment too late to start. Understanding our internal body systems is key to our future. It can make the difference between for many people as we are getting closer and closer to our ultimate goal. With a better understanding, we can have the power to save multiple lives.


Word Count: 482

References:

·    "Canada Slow to Adopt New Medical Technologies." Canadian Health Care Technology. Web. 1 Mar 2011.
    <http://www.canhealth.com/News928.html>.
·     "Medical Technology Watch Canada." National Research Council Canada. Web. 1 Mar 2011.
    <http://www.medtechwatch.ca/past_issues_e/MTWC_issue_2_e.pdf>.
·     "SoftScan for Patients." ART. 2011. Web. 1 Mar 2011.
       <http://www.art.ca/en/clinical/patients/patients.php>.
·     "Clinical Imaging." ART. 2011. Web. 1 Mar 2011.
       <http://www.art.ca/en/clinical/index.php>.
·     "ART Announces First Sale of SoftScan Optical Breast Imaging System." Medical News Today. 21/02/28. Web. 1 Mar 2011.
    <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/98143.php>.

Blogs I Commented On:
1. Dora's BioBlog
2. Claudia's BioBlog
Posted by at 3 comments:

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Biodiversity vs. Agriculture


        There’s no doubt that the world’s population is increasing, significantly. And because of this, human necessities and resources for these necessities are increasing in number also. This leads us to the connection between a growing population vs. the agricultural industry. With more people needing to be fed, the agricultural industry is high in demands, but it also needs to maintain its environmental biodiversity.



        The drive for increased agricultural production and profit has relied on a limited number of high-yielding crop varieties and animal breeds. The result is industrial agriculture, which is defined as a modern form of capital intensive farming in which the machinery and purchased are substituted for the labor of human beings and animals. This seems like a useful way to result with more food resources for humans to eat. We can get a lot more work done faster by using machines to do our work for us. Industrial agriculture has been under controversy because according to many agriculturists, its benefits can't outweigh its costs. Industrial agriculture has brought in cheap agricultural products. Not to mention the environmental costs of industrial agriculture which is simply huge. Besides pollution and soil destruction, it also consumes large amounts of water, energy and chemicals. Most industrial agricultural farms are monocultural. This means that they only produce one type of crop, simply because it is easier to maintain. Monoculture crops are often hybrid varieties of a traditional species. The improved variety produces more, so the farmer doesn’t bother planting the older variety and it slowly disappears. Also, farmers on traditional farms tended to grow a wide variety of crops and often raised livestock as well. With the advent of monoculture farming, traditional farming practices were largely abandoned. Many crop varieties and animal breeds have often simply disappeared. This disappearance is known as “extinction”, and it’s final.


         On the other hand, sustainable agriculture is both a philosophy and a system of farming. It involves design and management procedures that work with natural processes to conserve all resources and minimize waste and environmental damage, while maintaining or improving farm profitability. In practice such systems have tended to reduce or avoid the use of synthetically compounded fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators, and livestock feed additives.
         Basically, fewer genetic resources mean fewer opportunities for growth and innovation in agriculture. And growth and innovation are exactly what we need if agricultural production is going to keep up with population growth. Losing biodiversity doesn’t just limit our opportunities for growth; it puts our food supply in jeopardy. Agriculture becomes less able to adapt to environmental changes, such as global warming or the appearance of new pests and diseases. If our food supply can’t evolve, then we’re in deep trouble. The next step now is to plan how to achieve a solution for a brighter and greener future. Balance is the main factor in this case, as seen in the clip below:


Word Count: 482

References:

"Biodiversity." Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 24/11/2010. Web. 30 Dec 2010. 
<http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1186577581900&lang=eng>

“Biodiversity.” What FAO Does. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 2010. Web. 30 Dec 2010.
<http://www.fao.org/kids/en/biodiversity.html>

Southgate, Douglas. “Population Growth, Increases in Agricultural Production and Trends in Food Prices.” EJSD. 2007. Web. 30 Dec 2010.
<http://www.ejsd.org/publid/journal_article/13>

Feenstra, Gail. “What is Sustainable Agriculture?” UC Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program. Web. 30 Dec 2010.
<http://www.sarep.ucdavis.edu/concept.htm>

MacRae, Rod. “Definition of the term “Sustainable Agriculture.” Egological Agriculture Projects. Web. 30 Dec 2010.
<http://eap.mcgill.ca/sustain.htm>

“Industrial Agriculture.” Economy Watch. Web. 30 Dec 2010.
<http://www.economywatch.com/agriculture/types/industrial.html>

Blogs I Commented On:
1. Dora's BioBlog
2. Claudia's BioBlog
Posted by at 3 comments:

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Design-a-baby?

“Parents can now pick a kid's gender and screen for genetic illness. Will they someday select for brains and beauty too?” – Time Magazine


          More and more each day, the term ‘designer babies’ seems to cause controversy between many of scientists, parents, organizations and individuals around the world. A designer baby is a child whose genotype, physical characteristics and susceptibility to hereditary disease, is selected by its parents. Advances in genetics have given birth to this concept of 'designer baby', wherein parents and doctors are able to genetically screen embryos for any genetic disorders. A technique called ‘In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)’ involves the fertilization of the egg by the sperm in test tubes, outside the mother's body. This allows doctors to screen the embryos. Genetic screening has made it possible to eliminate genes associated with several genetic defects and illnesses. The picture and video below shows how genetic screening and vitro fertilization works:



            With such great controversy on the topic, designer babies are sure to have its share of pros and cons. Because parents are able to genetically screen the baby before it is born, with “pre-implantation process,” they are able to detect the possibility of the baby being born with a disease and prevent this from happening. Still, other parents use the same process mentioned above, not only for health reasons but for cosmetic reasons. For varied prices, parents can choose the gender, eye, skin and hair color of the baby. Numerous other physical traits such as intelligence, beauty, height, stopping a propensity towards obesity, freedom from mental illnesses, athletic ability, etc. can be also determined. 


           This prompts the question: Is there a moral distinction between treating or preventing disease and enhancing traits? A further moral complication comes from the different approaches to treating disease and those who suffer from them. For example: genetically modifying an embryo to remove a gene linked with a higher than average risk of asthma, but it doesn't prevent the existence of the person who might have suffered from it.
          Think about it. The concept of designer babies will lead to discrimination on the basis of certain qualities or traits. Kids of rich families will receive genetic enhancement leading to genetic 'aristocracy.' This gives them an unfair advantage over the other children. People unable to afford genetic screening will be looked down upon, causing a 'gap' in our society. Most parts of the world are still male dominated, and sex or gender determination of the baby can lead to gender discrimination across the world. Also, if the concept of 'designer babies' grows rapidly in the future, there is always the element of parents creating a designer baby for their own personal gain. Creating offspring this way only leads further and further away from the 'natural' births humans are able to give. For many of us around the world, it is time to realize that we, as humans can't control everything around the world.

Word Count: 493

References:
"What's a Designer Baby?". Bionet. 2002. 12 Nov 2010.

Agar, Nicholas. "Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations." actionbio.org. 2006. 12 Nov 2010.

Johnson, Priya. "Pros and Cons of Designer Babies." Buzzle.com. 12 Nov 2010.

Steere, Mike. "Designer Babies: Creating the Perfect Child." CNN Tech. 30/10/2008. 12 Nov 2010.

Henderson, Mark. "Demand for 'designer babies' to grow dramatically." The Sunday Times. 07/01/2010. 12 Nov 2010.

Blogs I Commented On:
Posted by at 3 comments:

Monday, October 4, 2010

Parks Canada Lend a Hand to the Environment



'Official Parks Canada Logo'


As humans, we have a lot of control and power over different species of animals, the environment, and ecosystems. Humans often forget that the Earth isn’t for ourselves; instead we share the Earth with other animals, plants and other organisms, as it is their homes also.
Fortunately, many people and organizations around the world are taking steps to sustain the biodiversity of our ecosystems. One of these organizations is called “Parks Canada.” This organization exists to make efforts directed at maintaining ecosystems in intact ecosystems of native species, within national parks. We all know about the negative impacts humans have on the ecosystems, which include: adjacent land use, downstream effects of air and water pollution, invasion by exotic species and climate change. These ultimately lead to the loss of biodiversity.
One course of action Parks Canada is doing to prevent this is through the involvement in the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Program as a means of integrating regional planning around parks. Parks Canada also follows ecosystem restoration, which is the process of intervening in an ecosystem to reestablish the mix of species, numbers and processes.


 
'Banff National Park Scenery'


Inventories of park ecosystem types are conducted periodically to provide an assessment of the distribution and condition of park ecosystems. Monitoring is another technique used by the organization to conserve biodiversity in national parks. Ecosystem monitoring measures changes in ecosystems over time. In Parks Canada, they manage ecosystems to maintain and restore ecological integrity (EI). In turn, ecological integrity is the healthy functioning of biological organisms within the ecosystem they inhabit.
Wildfires in national parks are risky. Although they are decomposers, they also prove to be a danger to many species of flora and fauna. ‘Fire Management’ has become a common term within different conservation organizations. This includes putting out wildfires that are threats to the people and to the park. No fire is left unattended. Instead, ‘prescribed’ fires are now used. These fires are ignited by park staff. How they are managed is planned before-hand. Trained specialists decide when, where, and under what limits such fires will be permitted to burn. They consider weather, type of vegetation, fire behavior, and terrain in order to burn safely and meet ecological goals. One way to inform visitors, families and individuals about the benefits and dangers of forests fires is to create a play for the audience. This is a brilliant plan because not only do the plays entertain people, it also educates them about the issue. Below is an example of one of these plays:




Many things are being done to sustain the biodiversity of our ecosystems. Many people have come to their senses, and plan to reverse the negative impact that we, as humans continue to have on the environment. Parks Canada proves to be an excellent example of a group of these positively influential people. They continue to help our planet, by helping our own country’s ground first.

Word Count: 485

References


Posted by at 1 comment:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)